Armed police stop grandfather with walking stick

[Sprackles]

I wonder what the Police response would have been had someone reported things the other way around.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537022/Armed-police-swoop-pensioner-searched-missing-Spaniel-tip-malicious-weapons-two-walking-sticks.html

[keg]

Indeed ( Assuming the Mail have got the facts right)

[TaxiDriver]

You'd have thought they'd have used their guns ;P

[four-wheel-drive]

This really annoys me the way the police expect an old man to lay on the floor what is wrong with the old way of asking people to put there hands on the roof of there car if it was young fit people that is a different matter.

[overandunder2012]

This really annoys me the way the police expect an old man to lay on the floor what is wrong with the old way of asking people to put there hands on the roof of there car if it was young fit people that is a different matter.

people kept pulling out guns and shooting at them

[four-wheel-drive]

people kept pulling out guns and shooting at them

If it happened to me the police man would get a walking stick pushed up his nose if he shoots me an unarmed pensioner he will be in the poo not me I will be out of it.

[overandunder2012]

If it happened to me the police man would get a walking stick pushed up his nose if he shoots me an unarmed pensioner he will be in the poo not me I will be out of it.

fortunately the old boy didnt opt for the death by cop option

[JohnFreeman1310]

Shame about the granddaughters dog, and the gypsy should have some explaining to do.

[Mungler]

I assume the travellers were prosecuted for wasting police time?

 

Anyone else would have been.....

[bi9johnny]

There's obviously more to it isn't there. Maybe the travellers couldn't get what they wanted via the pub so just caused trouble for the chap and his wife. Why anyone would take the word of a traveller is beyond me

[Mungler]

Bizarre isn't it.

 

I like the bit about making the old disabled fella go through the hole face down on the road in the rain and at gun point bit.

 

Common-sense-tastic.

[four-wheel-drive]

It all comes down to one thing the word ( GUN ) all you have to do is phone up the police and say that there is someone with a ( GUN ) and they all go running about like headless chickens it seems to make little difference if the ( GUN ) is in fact a childes plastic toy an old persons walking stick or an AK47 ( GUNS ) are always ( BAD ) oh to live in a country with a rational outlook about guns yes guns in the wrong hands are bad but most guns are not in the wrong hands and give people lots of pleasure shooting them.

Edited January 11, 2014 by four-wheel-drive

[secretagentmole]

Perhaps the police should have searched the gypsy site for unlicensed guns?

[Lg1]

Good job he never chucked his sticks away...

He would of been shot for sure :0/

[Sharpshooter.123]

Good job he never chucked his sticks away...

He would of been shot for sure :0/

And then it would have been lawful killing in everybody's eyes. Even if he had been dealing viagra Edited January 11, 2014 by Sharpshooter.123

[islandgun]

You cant be to careful with grandfathers I've found

[kent]

Lancs shot an old blind guy with a white stick in the back with a tazer because he didn't respond - HE WAS ALSO QUITE DEAF after suffering a few strokes! So the tazering was lucky not to kill him i suppose they might have said "lawfull killing" though. NO i am not joking this is true happened 2013 in Chorley.

I am totally disgusted by the actions of armed police personally, we really should not tolerate the mistakes they are making but it seems when a soldier under the pressures of combat makes a mistake its ok to hang him out to dry

[digger]

Is it bash the plod month ? How would we " not tolerate " ?

[JohnFreeman1310]

Lancs shot an old blind guy with a white stick in the back with a tazer because he didn't respond - HE WAS ALSO QUITE DEAF after suffering a few strokes! So the tazering was lucky not to kill him i suppose they might have said "lawfull killing" though. NO i am not joking this is true happened 2013 in Chorley.I am totally disgusted by the actions of armed police personally, we really should not tolerate the mistakes they are making but it seems when a soldier under the pressures of combat makes a mistake its ok to hang him out to dry

I remember this they said he was walking through town with a samurai sword and the officers who tazered him didnt realize it was a cane idiots.

John

[fortune]

Not very good is it? How many innocent people have to be treated like this by the police in these brainless tactics. How long can they hide behind being the police in such an inept way? The other week there was some sort of an alleged minor incident just along the road from me and the manner in which the police were acting was like some sort of comedy routine. There was the helicopter and at least a dozen vehicles with a whole crowd of officers milling about aimlessly for a couple of hours and then they were all gone. For the next couple of days there were house to house visits where they asked if the people that answered the door were the people that lived in the house ( Most people that answer the door generally live there) anyone had got CCTV or knew anything about anything. As far as I know no one was found or arrested and no one knows what it was all for. ( An incident?)

 

 

A local magistrate recently said to me that whenever there is police evidence it is either a total pack of lies or mistruths and it has to be taken with a big pinch of salt. And that was from a magistrate. Plebb gate springs to mind. Not very good is it?

[Mungler]

Is it bash the plod month ?

I'm afraid that blind allegiance to the police that will see them act with impunity.

 

The recently leaked report into curruption in the Met in the same week as the Duggan inquest and the resurfacing of plebgate has left a bad taste.

 

I feel 'mugged off' because when plebgate first hit the news I was backing the police - Andrew Mitchell is by all accounts a viscous politician and a nasty piece of work and everything stacked up against him. Well that's all gone way South now hasn't it? Add on top of that the police had a chance to make good with the IPCC investigation but it turns out the 3 coppers sent to independently investigate just used it as an opportunity to put the boot into Mitchell. Unfortunately for them Mitchell had the wherewithal to record that meeting and the inconsistencies between what Mitchell said and what the police officers had noted and reported back just showed they were part of a wider culture that lies and manipulates to back fellow officers in any situation and any event.

 

Bear in mind that at the time Mitchell was a serving cabinet minister - how brazen or experienced would you have to be to lie in a situation involving a cabinet minister and to think that you would either get away with it or be supported by your colleagues? Frightening really when you think about it - if that's was a cabinet minister can look forward to, the general public really should be worried.

 

Now then, that's all left a nasty taste for me because there is a parallel with the Duggan shooting.

 

Mitchell is a rude toff and so the police account fitted perfectly with who and what Andrew Mitchell is. How wrong was I and 95% of the rest of the population to blindingly back the police?

 

The recently leaked report on corruption in the met is also a real eye opener - worth a read

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537037/Scotland-Yard-corruption-leaked-report-claims-police-bribed-DESTROY-evidence-SLEPT-criminals-intimidated-witnesses.html?ico=home%5Eheadlines

Edited January 12, 2014 by Mungler

[debaser]

That's not quite right.

The police officer who was involved is sticking to his storey and taking a civil action against Mitchell for slander/libel.

Mitchell admits swearing but denies the use of the word pleb. Hopefully the civil case will will present the facts from both parties.

 

The officer who said he was a member of public passing and overheard the conversation will loose his job and may go to prison.

 

The three officers you refer to we're not investigating the incident. They were from the police federation (national not metropolitian) and reported the conversation they had with Mitchell differently then what he said, he did record it and they were put infront of the home affairs committe for this.

 

ATB

[Scully]

Have to agree with the above as Mungler has posted. When the incident first came to light, as much as my personal experiences of dealings with the Police have left a more than sour taste in my mouth, my natural distrust of politicians had me smiling at the thought of yet another one bringing about his own arrogant demise.

Blind faith in the Police or any body of officials which deal in authority over others is subservient and ill advised. We are constantly told that CCTV surveillence is there for the safety (safety ?What a crock of **** !) and benefit of the general public, perhaps it is time (for the benefit of the safety of the general public) that surveillance devices with the capability of recording footage and conversation were fitted to our serving Police? As so many on here are fond to point out, if they've nothing to hide, what harm can it do?

What an awful state of affairs we are possibly now facing.

[four-wheel-drive]

The thing that I find hard to understand is why the police seem to think that they have the rite to push people to the ground and jump on top of them looking for guns or knives this action may be alright if the person is behaving badly but if they are just normal people and not being aggressive.

 

I find it hard to understand after all they are the ones wearing all of the protective clothing stab vests etc not us and is not risking being hurt part of there job that they get well paid to do and end up with a good pension as well.

 

Having said that I am not knocking the police as in my part of the world it is very quit and to be honest I have not had much to do with them and when I have they have treated me well I am mainly going by what I have seen on TV or in the papers.

[Mungler]

That's not quite right.

1. The police officer who was involved is sticking to his storey and taking a civil action against Mitchell for slander/libel.

2. Mitchell admits swearing but denies the use of the word pleb. Hopefully the civil case will will present the facts from both parties.

 

3. The officer who said he was a member of public passing and overheard the conversation will loose his job and may go to prison.

 

4. The three officers you refer to we're not investigating the incident. They were from the police federation (national not metropolitian) and reported the conversation they had with Mitchell differently then what he said, he did record it and they were put infront of the home affairs committe for this.

 

ATB

 

1 & 2 : lets see how that civil action pans out (particularly having regard to No. 3 below)

3 : He should go to prison. I wonder what his interaction with the other officers was and whether they had a hand in his actions - no doubt we'll find out soon (ref 1)

4 : You are correct the 3 officers were from the federation and are now being investigated by the IPCC and recalled to go before the select committee >BBC<

 

And none of this has changed my mind or what underlay my original post

 

And what about the whole Stephen Lawrence "thing". Leaving aside the allegation of criminals buying off the original investigation and all that followed, we now find out the Met set up an operation to discredit and smear Stephen Lawrence's friend and the Lawrence family. Again, when the Stephen Lawrence story was first reported, the blind Daily Mail reader in me lapped up the version of events put forward by the Police and the right wing press; Doreen Lawrence was vilified. I now I have massive sympathy for her and the death of her son and a certain amount of admiration for her dedicating her life to straightening out the system and the Met Police.